No mod points at the moment, so I'll offer a simple, "Well said."
No mod points at the moment, so I'll offer a simple, "Well said."
Really? Your other web browsers lock up and become unresponsive for 5 minutes while pegging 100% of a CPU core? 'Cause Firefox does. Several times a day for me.
Just the fact it isn't on a government network is a fail on the audit itself. BTW I do audit networks.
As a member of the bureaucracy she bucked, I can understand you being annoyed but good God man, your vitriol is off the scale.
And for the record, I said the state department's email system was audited and implied (correctly) that it routinely receives poor grades for security. I made no statement about Clinton's server being audited let alone by government auditors or using any particular government standard. Before calling someone a liar, try to understand what they actually said.
You may cause me to retract part of what I said... not because of any misinformation about Clinton and her server but because your disrespect for fact in your position as a federal auditor implies that government servers receive improperly poor grades.
Auditors grade the state department's unclassified email system every year. By all reports, Clinton's email server was substantially more secure.
She was careless with classified information, I don't cheer that, but I absolutely cheer her choice to use her own, better secured email server for routine unclassified communication. And I roar with delight that she was willing to buck the bureaucracy doing it when nearly every other politician knuckles under to what the bureaucrats tell them they must do.
I was called in to help debug a problem with a server running on the NIPR. It seemed several out of every 100 TCP connections it made to the Internet failed inexplicably. An application level retry would immediately succeed but if you let the original TCP socket retry it kept on failing to connect.
So I investigated and it turned out about 2% of TCP -source- ports in the ephemeral range were blocked. Any TCP packet using those originating ports simply failed to arrive at the other side.
So, tracked down the firewall admin at Pearl and she explained that yes, they blocked those ports because they were commonly used by malware. Ports like 1234.
Okay, so even if I buy that that's reasonable, it would only apply to TCP -destination- ports, not TCP source ports. Went back and forth, back and forth. Eventually gave up and hacked the server to avoid the filtered TCP source ports.
And that level of incompetence is why I totally understand anyone who wants a direct Internet connection.
Then again, as someone involved in the Intelligence community he might just have wanted a commercial connection whose IP address wasn't associated with the military for some of his communications. You know, basic opsec.
Neither do I. That's what makes it interesting.
I have Hawking opinion fatigue. I prefer when speakers known to be an authority on some subjects make the effort to remind listeners when they philosophize on a subject outside their area of expertise.
Of course we can manage chaos. That's what business is all about.
Any particular software impacts specific processes within the business. We can know those impacts and place an upper bound on the cost of failures without having to know anything at all about how well the software is programmed.
If any of those impacts is a critical business failure they yeah, we'd better deal with the technical debt. But not every piece of software sits in a business critical path where it's capable of failing in a manner which does severe damage.
My bet is on no FTL or time travel
In my life I experienced pre-cognitive clairvoyance twice. Once with a time span of about a few minutes and once with a time span of a couple years. Each episode gave me several seconds of what future-me was seeing.
The first time I saw a disturbed camping storage pile on my family's mountain vacation property near Berkley Springs, West Virginia. Thieves had found the disguised storage and looted it. I saw it in a vision while out of sight several hundred yards away. A few minutes of walking later I saw it in person, -exactly- as the vision showed. I was around 7 years old at the time. And no, my parents did not believe me when I told them.
In my college years while in my bedroom in Virginia I saw a vision of a concrete ramp to the left of a short set of concrete stairs. I had no idea what it was. The closest I could come up with was the drainage ramps where I'd lived as a teenager. But I knew that was wrong - it was too wide and too shallow and the stairs where I lived before had iron railings which this did not.
A few years later at the University of Delaware I walked a sidewalk from a cafeteria back to the marine studies building. I'd walked the same path during a visit the prior year, but in the intervening span the school had decided to replace the worn dirt bike bypass beside the stairs with a concrete ramp. The ramp from my vision. I only later realized that in my surprise I looked down at it as I walked past tracking the very same view I remembered from my vision.
I can't prove it. I can't replicate it. I don't know how it works. I have no control over when or if it ever happens again. But as a personal matter, I'm satisfied that -something- pierces time.
Respectfully, I don't think you've done a good job assessing or presenting the risk posed by the code.
Is this Internet-facing code? If not, there may not be a security risk.
Is this business-critical code? If not, there may not be any business risk.
How often does the code get used? If it generates a report twice a year consuming 8 hours of staff time, how much time should really be spent resolving technical debt?
Technical debt should be avoided, but once you have it, it should be resolved either when it poses some legitimate risk to the organization or when the manpower needed to use or improve the code is impacted enough to merit the cost of refactoring.
Pull your head out of the sand. Like it or not, it appears to work. Now we have to figure out why.
You vastly underestimate the situation. The EM drive could be the Michelson-Morley experiments of the 21st century. If you don't recognize that, those are the series of experiments whose "inexplicable" data led to Einstein's discovery of relativity.
Not necessarily. There's no evidence for String Theory, right now it's just pretty-looking math, but if that changes then there's a possibility of travel from 3D position A to 3D position B via a 4th spacial dimension that does not not transit 3D points between. The old folded-paper concept where you can move between touching points on two layers without transiting the length of the paper. You never actually move faster than light but the practical impact in the 3D universe is that you have done so.
That neither violates special relativity nor nor requires any new kind of transit over time like dimensions.
The probability of string theory being true is pretty low right now and continues to fall for persistent lack of evidence. On the other hand, it took only 300 years for Einstein to figure out a completely unexpected adjustment to Newton's laws. Do you imagine another 300 years will reveal no adjustments to Einsteins?
It's that "barring any revelations in the nature of matter and/or space" part. We had so many this past hundred years it seems likely there are more to come.
Given that the typical human lifespan is under 100 years and Hawking says we have 1000 years to get there, letting a few billion die off doesn't seem to be an insurmountable problem.
The decision doesn't have to be logical; it was unanimous.